README.md in attractor-0.6.1 vs README.md in attractor-1.0.0

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Attractor ![build status](https://travis-ci.org/julianrubisch/attractor.svg?branch=master) <img src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4352208/65411858-3dc84200-ddee-11e9-99b6-c9cdbeb533c5.png" width="32">
 
-![attractor_v0 5 1](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4352208/66570048-0d620100-eb6d-11e9-8c2a-a2b008011edf.gif)
+![attractor_v0 6 1](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/4352208/67033292-b41e4280-f115-11e9-8c91-81b3bea4451c.gif)
 
 Many authors ([Michael Feathers](https://www.agileconnection.com/article/getting-empirical-about-refactoring), [Sandi Metz](https://www.sandimetz.com/blog/2017/9/13/breaking-up-the-behemoth)) have shown that an evaluation of churn vs complexity of files in software projects provide a valuable metric towards code quality. This is another take on the matter, for ruby code, using the `churn` and `flog` projects.
 
 ## Installation
 
@@ -32,10 +32,14 @@
 
 Or shorter:
 
     $ attractor report -p app/models
 
+Check javascript:
+
+    $ attractor report -p app/javascript -t js
+
 Watch for file changes:
 
     $ attractor report -p app/models --watch
 
 Serve at http://localhost:7890:
@@ -54,15 +58,17 @@
 
 Print a simple output to console:
 
     $ attractor calc
     $   --file_prefix|-p app/models
+    $   --type|-t rb|js
     $   --watch|-w
 
 Generate a full report
 
     $ attractor report 
     $   --file_prefix|-p app/models
+    $   --type|-t rb|js
     $   --watch|-w
 
 Serve the output on http://localhost:7890
 
     $ attractor serve